Seeing as how in theory (pardon my statism) "we" own it, I suppose you would divide it up into 314,918,000 pieces and distributed equally. . .yeah it's dumb. I'm curious to see what other folks think about this though, it's something that perplexed me too.

Rothbard made the point that workers should join together and take over property owned by the government, thus forming their own worker co-op.

That's kinda cool. I'd go along with that. What about Corporations though ? I mean the current legal position is that as a Corporation is a separate legal person, it owns the property. Obviously with no state the Corporation would no longer exist, so would the assets go to the current stock holders ? Or should they suffer the same fate as the property held by other statist institutions ?

^That depends. Many corporate entities that exist today are nothing more than side arms of the state. Look, for example, at Monsanto. Many of the individuals that sit on the FDA were once top level officials at Monsanto. By getting control, they can influence the direction of the FDA, and in return, they get their poison approved into the market.

My analysis is that if the State disappears, then the corporate powers that use government welfare to their power would more than likely disappear as well. They would be subject to market powers and would have no way of being bailed out.

Whatever is in a State gets handed to that state. I would like to see it all sold, one thing (ship, building, "park") at a time, to the highest bidder, with all proceeds being given back to the taxpayers proportional to how much they paid the year before.

In other words, the tax leaches, the welfare queens and corporate whores, would get nothing.

The usual "answer" is that people effectively homestead what is adjacent to their own existing property, to the middle of the road.

Then multiple options occur. If there is already a "home owner's association" it can contract for maintenance, set speed limits, etc.

Or the owners can form their own "Pine Tree Road" association, or every decade or so create a petition and contract that everyone signs on to and pays for maintenance proportionate to the size of their part of the road.

I assume two things: That deliberate acts to deny the well-established Common Law principles of "right of way" and "traditional use" will be treated as a transgressions and be prosecutable.

Second, that just as with any other "self help" situations, profit-seeking entrepreneurs will come up with many ways to organize and promote Road Owner's Contracts so that their paving companies can made the decision easy and convenient to use them, rather than the competition.

The usual "answer" is that people effectively homestead what is adjacent to their own existing property, to the middle of the road.

Then multiple options occur. If there is already a "home owner's association" it can contract for maintenance, set speed limits, etc.

Or the owners can form their own "Pine Tree Road" association, or every decade or so create a petition and contract that everyone signs on to and pays for maintenance proportionate to the size of their part of the road.

I assume two things: That deliberate acts to deny the well-established Common Law principles of "right of way" and "traditional use" will be treated as a transgressions and be prosecutable.

Second, that just as with any other "self help" situations, profit-seeking entrepreneurs will come up with many ways to organize and promote Road Owner's Contracts so that their paving companies can made the decision easy and convenient to use them, rather than the competition.

I know the schpeel, I was just joking about the idea of getting free land via the collapse of the State :S

Logged

"[In a Socialist Commonwealth] the wheels will turn, but will run to no effect." - Ludwig von Mises

The usual "answer" is that people effectively homestead what is adjacent to their own existing property, to the middle of the road.

Then multiple options occur. If there is already a "home owner's association" it can contract for maintenance, set speed limits, etc.

Or the owners can form their own "Pine Tree Road" association, or every decade or so create a petition and contract that everyone signs on to and pays for maintenance proportionate to the size of their part of the road.

I assume two things: That deliberate acts to deny the well-established Common Law principles of "right of way" and "traditional use" will be treated as a transgressions and be prosecutable.

Second, that just as with any other "self help" situations, profit-seeking entrepreneurs will come up with many ways to organize and promote Road Owner's Contracts so that their paving companies can made the decision easy and convenient to use them, rather than the competition.

I know the schpeel, I was just joking about the idea of getting free land via the collapse of the State :S

Oh I'll get some land...

Logged

"A stone is heavy and the sand is weighty but a fool's wrath is heavier than them both"-Tuek

"Knowledge is power, and it's light weight. The more you know the less you need."-Cody Lundin